Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 854 2017 SLD 854
Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, Islamabad
ITA No. 1126/IB/2013, (Tax Year - 2014) U/s. 161/205 ITA No. 1127/IB/2013, (Tax Year - 2014) U/s. 182, Date of Hearing: 28.03.2017, Date of Order: 05.04.2017
FAHEEMUL HAQ KHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Appellant by: Ch. Iftikhar Ahmed, Advocate
Respondent by: Mr. Faisal Mushtaq, DR

MR. ALTAF HUSSAIN, PROP. M/S IQBAL BUNDHAN SHADI HALL ISLAMABAD .... --Appellant

VS

THE CIR, (A-III) RTO ISLAMABAD ... --Respondent

Law: Income Tax Ordinance, 2001

Section: 161,165,176,182,205,236D

THIS ORDER PASSED BY: FAHEEMUL HAQ KHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:---.--- The captioned Income Tax Appeals have been filed by the appellant/taxpayer against the order Nos. 722-723, dated 16.09.2014 passed by the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals-II), Islamabad as per following common grounds; "..1. That no notices of hearing of appeal never ever been received/served by the appellant, hence the order passed by the CIR is ab-initio void. 2. That all the notices of hearing issued by the DCIR were duly be complied with information that statements u/s 165 has already been filed accordingly and tax also paid thereupon. 3. That the appellant's business situated on "off road" in the "Tarlia Village" where such excessive "per head rates" could not be assessed without definite information. 4. That penalty imposed by the DCIR of Rs. 25000/- is also illegal and compliance with made accordingly by the appellant in time. 5. That the information gathered as mentioned in the body of the order are totally floating on thin ice, and based upon a conjectures and surmises and the learned DCIR has not observed/follow the rules framed by the FBR. Hence, the order passed is illegal and void. 6. That the Order passed by the DCIR is classic example for non-reading of record/detail record produced during the course of hearing. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessing officer observed that the taxpayer being a marriage hall was liable to collect advance tax @10% on the total amount of the bill in terms of Section 236D of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. Accordingly notice u/s 176 asking detail/evidence for the same was issued which remained uncoupled with. Thereafter notice u/s 182(2) was issued which also remained un-complied. Accordingly the impugned order was passed by imposing initial penalty amounting to Rs. 25000/-. Thereafter, an order u/s.161/205 was passed considering the taxpayer in default and charging him to the tune of Rs. 504,820/- for the alleged default. 3. Being aggrieved with the order of the DCIR, the Appellant/taxpayer filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Islamabad who vide his order No.722 dated 16.09.2014 decided the appeal in the following words;…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492